Fair point that can just as easily, and more urgently, be inverted: why don't those building AI for $subject actually engage with the foundational $subject literature? Including the histories of ethics, discrimination, etc in $subject domain...https://twitter.com/jackclarkSF/status/997512143695241217 …
-
-
The perception that such issues can be distilled down to the mere "facts" is exactly one of the big problems of how technicians approach these questions.
-
In the world of engineers and scientists, facts are the things that are true. That is why the idea that we should also impose things that are not facts sounds disturbing.
- 5 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
For instance, most folks understand ethics as something like ‘indoctrination with good values’, instead of principled resolution of conflicts of interest under conditions of shared purpose, etc. We need better social science, and social science education.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Few yrs ago was having debate w senior AI engineer @ FAMGA, I was arguing that every team researching, deving & deploying a system should have sociologist, anthropologist, ethicist etc. (Angry) response was "what makes an ethicist have 'better ethics' than me!?"
-
(tried to explain that an ethicist wouldn't necessarily be a more 'moral' person by default, but they'd be dedicated full-time to thinking abt ethical consequences, which the engineer cld also be capable of if they also dedicated as much time. This pleased him a bit I think)...
- 3 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.